BRASÍLIA — Brazil’s
ambitions to be a more important player on the global diplomatic stage
are crashing headlong into the efforts of the United States and other
Western powers to rein in Iran’s nuclear arms program.

But the visit is drawing criticism from lawmakers and former
diplomats here and in the United States, who say it could undercut
Western efforts to press Iran on its nuclear program, and consequently
chill Brazil’s relations with the United States and damage its growing
reputation as a global power.

...“This state visit is a gross error, a terrible mistake,” said Representative Eliot L. Engel,
Democrat of New York, chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Western
Hemisphere. “He is illegitimate with his own people, and Brazil is now
going to give him the air of legitimacy at a time when the world is
trying to figure out how to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons. It makes no sense to me, and it tarnishes the image of Brazil, quite frankly.”

But wait! If it is good enough for Obama, why not Da Silva? Or so says the State Department:

But Mr. da Silva’s overture to Iran is consistent with President Obama’s
policy of engagement, and the Obama administration says it is
optimistic that the meeting will not damage and at best could reinforce
the efforts already under way by Washington and European powers to deal
with Iran.

“We would hope that all our friends and allies would understand that
this is really a critical moment for Iran itself,” Ian C. Kelly, a
State Department spokesman, said Thursday. “We would hope that Brazil
would play a constructive role in trying to get Iran to do the right
thing and fulfill its international obligations.”

get Iran to do the right thing and fulfill its international obligations.”

The Obama administration keeps saying this, as if it means anything to Iran. If everyone keeps accepting Iran and what they are doing, then what "international obligations" are they supposed to think they have?
And why does Obama think these "obligations" are more important to them than nuclear weapons?

Hit and Run, that is a wonderful link under your name, and I thank you for it. But it doesn't explain where the word on the street is coming from, IMO. Is there really word on the street to that effect?

On second thought, even if there isn't, let's spread the word that there is. I think it would be funny to see Mr. Gibbs explain that Obama really didn't mind it being taken back. Like he explained that getting the Olympics for Chicago wasn't really important.

Hit and run, Maybe it is because I keep switching back and for between JOM and the financial markets (who have apparently decided that the AGW scandal will have no effect whatso ever on stocks) but I don't see how that title translates into Lula getting the Nobel fraud prize pulled back from Obama?

Pagar, "The Voice in My Head" is where the idea that Lula would outmaneuver Obama on the peace prize came from. That is,the only street where such a word is being heard is my own. I'm just goofing on the cluelessness and weakness of Obama on the world stage.

Which may not make much sense,because it is his weakness that the Nobel committee was rewarding anyway.

""I understand how much work you are doing to prevent and control damage from the IG matter," Solomont wrote in an email to Eric Tanenblatt, a board member who had talked to the press. "I want you to know how much I personally appreciate all your efforts."

What is the difference between what the AGW scandal info says and this information? It seems to me they are cover-ups with no one (that matters )investigating either one. Until people start going to jail for this stuff, nothing will come of it.

Precisely , Jane. Precisely. Fancy pants talk about jaw jawing and all the while bowing to the wishes of the most aggressive thugs. Let the fittest survive in that jungle. Ironically, theOnce got the most fragile voters to support his climb to a position where he can make their lives immeasurably more awful.

***
The Brazilian President showed who he is when he backed Zelaya in his bid to take over Honduras as JEFE MAXIMO POR VIDA. And when he consorts with Castro, Hugo Chavez, and the Iranian Hitler.
***
Birds of a feather (aka vultures) flock together.
***
Rocketman
***

The Iranians are already in Venezuela, and
Nicaragua as well, so we've managed to tie the two together. There are even reports that the Contras are regrouping in part. OT, where do the NCBE get the idea of a boom later this year.

Narciso, I think one could bet that the Iranians are everywhere in Chavez's circle of friends. Meanwhile, the Obama Administration seems intent on making sure that everyone anywhere in the world understands that America is not going to side with people/nations that believe in human freedom. People/nations who has traditionally sided with American.

Pres. Obama is an old Poker player, he does not show his hand until he is ready to do so...., and Pres. Obama's trip was one to increase cooperation, trust, work on nuclear arm threats, better trade deals and a myriad of issues. As for China, through face to face dialouge Pres. Obama can work on getting us out of the mountain of debt we now owe to China. Pres. Obama also understands that we now live in an interdependent world and what one country does effects us all. And too, in order to get some countries in line there must be an alliance of countries to stand strong. I cannot believe this authors naivetee unless they are part of the Party of No and Fear whose job it is to "muddy the waters". They remind me of the Great Wizard of Oz who told Dorothy that if she killed the wicked witch of the east, he would get her back to Kansas... all the time knowing he had no such powers!

Angellight: Guess you didn't get the word yet that your guy is a total putz. A disaster on the international stage, a bigger disaster on the domestic front (healthcare at an alltime low of only 38% approval).

through face to face dialouge [sic] Pres. Obama can work on getting us out of the mountain of debt we now owe to China.

Love this one. How does "dialogue" get us out of debt? Are we going to ask for debt foregiveness? Never mind the fact that Obama's reckless spending has multiplied our indebtedness.

Which brings up the ever-ridiculous NY Times, which has this to say:

With the national debt now topping $12 trillion, the White House estimates that the government’s tab for servicing the debt will exceed $700 billion a year in 2019, up from $202 billion this year...

The potential for rapidly escalating interest payouts is just one of the wrenching challenges facing the United States after decades of living beyond its means. (my emphasis)

Well, no, it's after just 11 months of the Obama administration's insane spending. Amd as if this wasn't a completely predictable outcome of porkulus. This is the NYT's effort to support the "I inherited this mess" meme of Obama. It doesn't pass muster.

soylent - thanks for sharing.
FTA: "Interviewed 05 October 2004 in Brasilia by Brazil's "TV Global," U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said, in a reiteration of prior U.S. statements on the subject, that the United States fully accepts that Brazil has no desire, plans or interest in developing a nuclear weapon, but rather aims to develop a nuclear power program for peaceful purposes. Powell said Brazil's plan for a nuclear power program is an issue between the Brazilians and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which works for the safe, secure and peaceful uses of nuclear science and technology. The United States hopes that in due course Brazil "will see the wisdom" of signing on to what is called the "Additional Protocol" to expand the IAEA's authority to detect clandestine nuclear programs and increase the number of nuclear-related activities that a signatory must declare to the agency, Powell said."
The U.N. is our friend

JimmyK, we have to be fair. Geo. W. spent a hell of a lot of money on ends that were idiotic at best, and government growing at worst. This is why the aspiration "Let's get the Reagans without the Carters," is so dam hard to achieve. In 2000, most everyone would have picked Geo. W. as a "Reagan." They weren't entirely wrong as Geo. W's resolution against terrorism showed. But in domestic policy they were dead wrong. It's striking how the strong, confident, burdened President who bet the war on the "surge" could collapse into a panic when faced with a financial collapse, a collapse he did not do enough to avoid. The remedies he chose were poor, and left the door wide open for The Once to ram a whale's dose of bunkum down the nations' throats.

As for the talk of impeachment, it is idiotic. How, pray tell, are you going to get a conviction when you can't even stop health care by filibuster? The GOP let such wild talk infect it in 1998, and look at the results: impeachment is now talked up no matter who is Prez, no matter if the offense is a parking ticket. Bah. There's a long hard road ahead for this nation. It will require stamina, not frenzy, to traverse it.

Ok, I'm too lazy to research this myself and thinking somebody here might know... At some point there was discussion that McIntyre had made an FOI request for pretty much the stuff in the leak, and speculation that someone involved in the FOI response might be the leaker. So, there was an FOI request -- does anyone know if there had been a formal response to that request yet?

Because if the Hockey Team guys had already sent back an official response claiming that the stuff in the data dump doesn't exist, then they are in a WORLD of hurt...

Well he may be Jimmy Carter in how he cringes and cowers and apologizes to the rest of the world, but when it comes to his domestic actions attacking liberty and the economy in this country, he's suddenly the reincarnation of Atilla the Hun.

I think it packs a lot more punch than the Tea Party, don't you? In fact, I was so convinced it should be our talking point that I hot footed it over to the domain name registry back in April and laid claim to:

partyofno.us

Then, under the influence, so to speak, of what I'll just call domain name fever, I registered:

I can't find the site, cathy, but I recall reading the request was denied and one day later the packet was put online. OTOH the BBC weatherman Hudson says he received the packet on October 12, read it and apparently did nothing with it.

Geo. W. spent a hell of a lot of money on ends that were idiotic at best, and government growing at worst.

I would not disagree, but his deficits are a drop in the bucket compared to O's, most importantly because O's are projected out to 2020. We can also blame Bush for the TARP, but at least that was a one-time expenditure, not necessarily a permanent ratcheting up like porkulus and obamacare inevitably will be.

If there was a Republican Noise Machine worthy of the name, they'd have had ads up for months on "The Party of 'No' Through the Ages":

Aztec: The crops are failing again. We need to cut the hearts out of more virgins.

Republican Aztec: No! That's a terrible thing to do, and it won't solve the problem.

****
Salem Democrat: The drought continueth! Verily we are under the fell influence of witchcraft! We must needs burn the old women at the stake!

Salem Republican: No! That's a terrible thing to do, and it won't solve the problem.
****
Plantation Owner: There's cotton dying in the fields because we don't have enough Negroes to pick it. We need to legalize the slave trade to save the economy.

Early Republican: No! Slavery is wrong, and we can invent machines to do the job faster and cheaper.

Bgates, in 2000, the chioce was Geo. W. or Gore. Put the question: 'Who's the "Reagan," Geo. W. or Gore?' "Neither one" is a perfectly fine answer, but in that case, you'd have to vote third party or abstain.

Who did you vote for in 2000? Why? Myself, I voted for Gore, thinking the economy was headed downhill, let Good Al take the rap, and I didn't like Geo. W.'s crony capitalism. I backed this judgement right up to 9/11, at which moment it looked silly. That's the way life goes.

Care to tell us your 2000 electoral history?

Narciso, I think we are living in grim times that are likely to get worse and stay so for some time. But I am not the one howling "Communist! Socialist! Doom!" There's a lot of 200 proof quacks on display, and one benefit is that their quackery may inoculate the populace just as Jimmy Bumpkin did in 1977-81. Both Bushes did much to counteract Reagan's good work. It's part of the reason we are undergoing Once therapy now. I prefer to laugh at the quacks who rule us. What's the alternative? Those like Pofarmer seethe and make noises about bullets and eyes, but will never follow through on such vitriol. All they are doing is giving the Left a chance to hit JOM as a den of crazies who talk about murder and oughta be investigated.

No. Wait patiently, try to see clearly what is going on, and donate time and money to those who may be able to heave The Once and his motley gang to electoral oblivion. There's a number of possibilities open to all citizens. JMHanes is acting on what she sees as possibilities. What are you doing?

In other domain name news, after running through the official U.S.-China Joint Statement promulgated by Hu Jintao and Obama, I ignored a mountain of looming deadlines, to my own immanent regret, and culled a Top Ten List from Obama's latest global meanderings.

If only because it would be nice to think that at least one other person in the world somewhere, aside from me, might actually lay eyes on it, here's Overclocking the Irony Meter. It may have more blockquotes than commentary, for a change -- I decided not to risk a formal analysis, though. In the interest of overkill, I LUN'd it too!

Here is the FOI Denial letter to McIntyre. There is some interesting speculation at WUWT concerning the provenance of the CRUtape Letters. It's certainly possible that the released info was compiled as an unwinnowed meta-archive containing material to be used in the event a response was mandated.

Very good, jmh.
ook, maybe it's time we start grading him by minutes he's spent working as opposed to time spent on date nights, wandering the globe pointlessly, golfing, hosting state dinners, Halloween parties and Wednesday night soirees.

I mean I figure he's put in about 15 minutes of real work and for that he's performance is not as bad as it might be for a full time official..

Thanks, clarice, you're a trooper! I meant to include this bit from the Garrett interview which I'm sure will resonate with JOM's As-I've-Always-Said fans:

Nobody's been more disappointed than I have to see how high the unemployment rate has gotten. And, I spend every waking hour, when I'm talking to my economic team, about how we are going to put people back to work.

What amuses me is that he must have realized mid-sentence that "every waking hour" wasn't going to fly -- even before you get to the dates, golf, parties, campaigning, not to mention simultaneously spending every waking hour on healthcare for all. The way it comes out, though, almost sounds like he's dozing off when he's not meeting with his economics team -- which would explain a lot.

OK, JMH, just to prove that no good deed goes unpunished, I'm sure all JOMers are going to expect a regular "irony meter" update from you. Say, once a week. You're not busy with anything else, are you? :-))

To enhance open and honest discussion, BBC Climate Reporter Richard Black has re-opened comments to the BBC's Climate Blog, but only if you do not mention the CRU hacked documents, nor link to any site that mentions or contains any information from the CRU hacked documents.

You are however now allowed to comment on Blacks latest post about Sea Level temps rising to 451 Fahrenheit, and the importance of the Copenhagen Conference to assist in that rise.

Oops, did I say Fahrenheit 451?
I meant 6 Degrees Centigrade, and to clarify, Black says he and Copenhagen want to prevent that rise, not enable it. Could'a fooled me.

Ha-ha! JMH, thanks for mentioning the overwhelming schedule of Pres. #44. After reading your inundation of ironies link, I was thinking about the O-man's schedule of activities and how many are in the presidential glamor role he prefers. To make up for all the party time, however,we have learned today he will be staying up late with his security team cramming for that Afghanistan decision and using his camouflage Magic 8-ball until it comes up with the right, er, leftist answer.

Bgates, your talents are limitless. However hazy you were on current events in 2000, you are the perfect dinner guest in TM's circle when the question of "What Prez has double consecutive consonants in first and last names?" comes up. I say to you: flourish! I must admit your 2004 vote may depress you when I tell you that I voted the same way, for the same reason. Still, that shouldn't stop you from flourishing. I won't ask about 2008 which was a ferocious choice for anyone who prefers liberty to ochlocracy.

Grim times. Reagan got round them with an optimistic outlook. In a rather different way, so does SP. That, I think, is what's needed in these times instead of competing in the who-can-flick-each-other's-scabs contest. Leave that to Sullivan, the natural Once fan.

Rick B. thanks for the link and even more for the "CRUtape letters" bit.

JMH: "Your own personality may play a larger part in the route you choose than you might think."

JMH, it might be what you were refering to, but there is very interesting research of late about exactly how important personality is when picking stocks, for example, or when selling them. One of the conclusions was that while the general rule is that having, say, 30 stocks is better (less risky, more profitable) than having, say, 5...the impact of the personality of the picker is so strong on the outcome that some are actually worse off (more risky, less profitable) with more stocks rather than fewer. It was interesting to see it quantified.